“TWN was hacked -this per Steve. It appears more than once, so don’t blame TWN’s web guys”
Yes, I know it was hacked. Only a matter of time before this jackass questions comes along and claims we are advancing “conspiracy theories”, and its “just a glitch”.
Regardless, Steve’s web guys, in fixing it, have screwed up CAPTCHA even worse. Now, when I post, the post doesn’t appear unless I completely refresh the site, not just the thread. So, posting has become even lengthier in process, over and above what was already a cumbersome process.
Can you tell me any other blog site that has such a pain in the ass posting process? I can’t think of one, and I can think of PLENTY of them that aren’t riddled with spam. So if stopping spam is the reasoning behind this Edsel of a CAPTCHA process, it seems there must be other ways to acxcomplish it.

Nice.
Who coulda believed trhey could fuck CAPTCHA up even worse than it already was?
Steve musta found his web guys in a government agency, for only they are so proficient at going fromn bad to worse.

From the Palestine Note….http://palestinenote.com/cs/blogs/blogs/archive/2009/10/30/will-nancy-pelosi-and-george-miller-allow-passage-of-resolution-bashing-the-goldstone-report.aspx
Will Nancy Pelosi and George Miller allow passage of resolution bashing the Goldstone Report?
It is hard to imagine that the United States Congress can outdo its own record of rousing support for any and all Israeli actions and policies. But now, according to a report by Spencer Ackerman in the Washington Independent, it is preparing to do just that.
Next week the Democratic House is slated to vote on a resolution – introduced by Howard Berman (chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee), Gary Ackerman (chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East) and two Republicans, Ranking Members Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Dan Burton.
The legislators pushing the resolution say the Goldstone report is unfair and biased against Israel. Although the report condemns both Israel and Hamas for “war crimes,” the representatives take strong issue with Goldstone’s finding that Israel took little care to protect civilians during its massive onslaught.
Of course, the numbers themselves support Goldstone. According to B’Tselem, the Israeli human rights organization, “Israeli security forces killed 1,382 Palestinians during the 22-day military operation. Of those, 774 did not take part in the hostilities, including 320 minors and 109 women over the age of 18.”
Number of Israelis killed: 9 (3 by friendly fire).
The resolution ignores those numbers, offering not even a word of sympathy to those who were killed.
t is hard to imagine that Speaker Nancy Pelosi or George Miller, chair of the House Democratic Policy Committee, will permit this resolution to come to floor. Both have worked for decades to promote America’s role as honest broker between Israelis and Palestinians and a more balanced policy toward the Muslim world.
But passing this resolution will remove any illusion that the United States can serve as mediator in the conflict. It also will send a message to Arabs and Muslims worldwide that our much proclaimed human rights ideals do not apply to them. That will hardly help us in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else in the Muslim world. This resolution can be opposed on national security grounds alone.
Does any of this matter to the House members who are pushing this resolution or the majority likely to vote for it? Many of them will likely be liberals too who have rightly criticized actions by our own country in Iraq, Afghanistan or wherever, some going all the way back to Vietnam. Why this exception?
On the same day that news came of the Congressional resolution, Ken Silverstein of Harper’s interviewed Desmond Travers, one of the four members of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which produced the Goldstone Report. Travers is a retired colonel in the Irish army who commanded troops with in various UN and EU peace support missions. Excerpts follow.
Silverstein to Travers: “Were you surprised by the criticism of the report?
Travers: “There was a lot of criticism even before the report came out, primarily against individuals, especially Justice Richard Goldstone. So we were not unduly surprised by the whinging when the report was released, except for the intensity and viciousness of the personal attacks. Justice Goldstone has publicly invited the critics, especially within the U.S. government, to come forward with substantive evidence of incorrect or inaccurate statements. But there has been no credible criticism of the report itself or of the information elucidated in it.
Silverstein: Critics have also said that Hamas deliberately inserted its fighters among civilians and that doing so increased the civilian toll. Did you find that to be the case?
Travers: We found no evidence that Hamas used civilians as hostages. I had expected to find such evidence but did not. We also found no evidence that mosques were used to store munitions. Those charges reflect Western perceptions in some quarters that Islam is a violent religion. Gaza is densely populated and has a labyrinth of makeshift shanties and a system of tunnels and bunkers. If I were a Hamas operative the last place I’d store munitions would be in a mosque. It’s not secure, is very visible, and would probably be pre-targeted by Israeli surveillance. There are a many better places to store munitions. We investigated two destroyed mosques-one where worshippers were killed-and we found no evidence that either was used as anything but a place of worship.
There is a sinister and foolish notion among certain proponents of insurgency warfare that to fight an insurgency means that civilians will inevitably be killed. But if you give the state authority to be indiscriminate with the lives of civilians in pursuing insurgents, it plays into the hands of the insurgents. Dead bodies are grist to the insurgents’ mill: if the dead are on your side they represent insurgent victories and if the dead are on their side then they have martyrs.
Silverstein: What other issues do you think need to be addressed
We were disturbed by the lethality and toxicity of weapons used in Gaza, some of which have been in Western arsenals since the Cold War, such as white phosphorous, which incinerated 14 people, including several children in one attack; flechettes, small darts that are designed to tumble upon entering human flesh in order to cause maximum damage, strictly in breach of the Geneva Convention; and highly carcinogenic tungsten shrapnel and dime munitions, which contain tungsten in powder form. There is also a whole cocktail of other problematic munitions suspected to have been used.
There are a number of other post-conflict issues in Gaza that need to be addressed. The land is dying. There are toxic deposits from all the munitions that have been dropped. There are serious issues with water-its depletion and its contamination. There is a high instance of nitrates in the soil that is especially dangerous to children. If these issues are not addressed, Gaza may not even be habitable by World Health Organization norms.”
It is not a surprise that the Israeli government does not want its tactics criticized. But it is a travesty when Israel’s friends in Congress join Israel in that resistance to criticism. 320 children were killed and the House will go on record criticizing not those deaths but those who say they should never have happened.
The House resolution needs to be stopped or re-written so that its purpose is not to shoot the messenger but to condemn violence directed at civilians by both sides.
MJ Rosenberg

From the Palestine Note….http://palestinenote.com/cs/blogs/blogs/archive/2009/10/30/will-nancy-pelosi-and-george-miller-allow-passage-of-resolution-bashing-the-goldstone-report.aspx
Will Nancy Pelosi and George Miller allow passage of resolution bashing the Goldstone Report?
It is hard to imagine that the United States Congress can outdo its own record of rousing support for any and all Israeli actions and policies. But now, according to a report by Spencer Ackerman in the Washington Independent, it is preparing to do just that.
Next week the Democratic House is slated to vote on a resolution – introduced by Howard Berman (chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee), Gary Ackerman (chairman of the Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East) and two Republicans, Ranking Members Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Dan Burton.
The legislators pushing the resolution say the Goldstone report is unfair and biased against Israel. Although the report condemns both Israel and Hamas for “war crimes,” the representatives take strong issue with Goldstone’s finding that Israel took little care to protect civilians during its massive onslaught.
Of course, the numbers themselves support Goldstone. According to B’Tselem, the Israeli human rights organization, “Israeli security forces killed 1,382 Palestinians during the 22-day military operation. Of those, 774 did not take part in the hostilities, including 320 minors and 109 women over the age of 18.”
Number of Israelis killed: 9 (3 by friendly fire).
The resolution ignores those numbers, offering not even a word of sympathy to those who were killed.
t is hard to imagine that Speaker Nancy Pelosi or George Miller, chair of the House Democratic Policy Committee, will permit this resolution to come to floor. Both have worked for decades to promote America’s role as honest broker between Israelis and Palestinians and a more balanced policy toward the Muslim world.
But passing this resolution will remove any illusion that the United States can serve as mediator in the conflict. It also will send a message to Arabs and Muslims worldwide that our much proclaimed human rights ideals do not apply to them. That will hardly help us in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else in the Muslim world. This resolution can be opposed on national security grounds alone.
Does any of this matter to the House members who are pushing this resolution or the majority likely to vote for it? Many of them will likely be liberals too who have rightly criticized actions by our own country in Iraq, Afghanistan or wherever, some going all the way back to Vietnam. Why this exception?
On the same day that news came of the Congressional resolution, Ken Silverstein of Harper’s interviewed Desmond Travers, one of the four members of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which produced the Goldstone Report. Travers is a retired colonel in the Irish army who commanded troops with in various UN and EU peace support missions. Excerpts follow.
Silverstein to Travers: “Were you surprised by the criticism of the report?
Travers: “There was a lot of criticism even before the report came out, primarily against individuals, especially Justice Richard Goldstone. So we were not unduly surprised by the whinging when the report was released, except for the intensity and viciousness of the personal attacks. Justice Goldstone has publicly invited the critics, especially within the U.S. government, to come forward with substantive evidence of incorrect or inaccurate statements. But there has been no credible criticism of the report itself or of the information elucidated in it.
Silverstein: Critics have also said that Hamas deliberately inserted its fighters among civilians and that doing so increased the civilian toll. Did you find that to be the case?
Travers: We found no evidence that Hamas used civilians as hostages. I had expected to find such evidence but did not. We also found no evidence that mosques were used to store munitions. Those charges reflect Western perceptions in some quarters that Islam is a violent religion. Gaza is densely populated and has a labyrinth of makeshift shanties and a system of tunnels and bunkers. If I were a Hamas operative the last place I’d store munitions would be in a mosque. It’s not secure, is very visible, and would probably be pre-targeted by Israeli surveillance. There are a many better places to store munitions. We investigated two destroyed mosques-one where worshippers were killed-and we found no evidence that either was used as anything but a place of worship.
There is a sinister and foolish notion among certain proponents of insurgency warfare that to fight an insurgency means that civilians will inevitably be killed. But if you give the state authority to be indiscriminate with the lives of civilians in pursuing insurgents, it plays into the hands of the insurgents. Dead bodies are grist to the insurgents’ mill: if the dead are on your side they represent insurgent victories and if the dead are on their side then they have martyrs.
Silverstein: What other issues do you think need to be addressed
We were disturbed by the lethality and toxicity of weapons used in Gaza, some of which have been in Western arsenals since the Cold War, such as white phosphorous, which incinerated 14 people, including several children in one attack; flechettes, small darts that are designed to tumble upon entering human flesh in order to cause maximum damage, strictly in breach of the Geneva Convention; and highly carcinogenic tungsten shrapnel and dime munitions, which contain tungsten in powder form. There is also a whole cocktail of other problematic munitions suspected to have been used.
There are a number of other post-conflict issues in Gaza that need to be addressed. The land is dying. There are toxic deposits from all the munitions that have been dropped. There are serious issues with water-its depletion and its contamination. There is a high instance of nitrates in the soil that is especially dangerous to children. If these issues are not addressed, Gaza may not even be habitable by World Health Organization norms.”
It is not a surprise that the Israeli government does not want its tactics criticized. But it is a travesty when Israel’s friends in Congress join Israel in that resistance to criticism. 320 children were killed and the House will go on record criticizing not those deaths but those who say they should never have happened.
The House resolution needs to be stopped or re-written so that its purpose is not to shoot the messenger but to condemn violence directed at civilians by both sides.
MJ Rosenberg

I was very pleased to see the Palestinian perspective given a chance to be heard…I wish Stewart had given his guest, Anna Balzer a chance to speak..the one time she did get to say anything, she was rudely interrupted…her point was that Jews and Muslims lived peacefuly together in Palestine, unlike in Europe, before Israel was formed, but Stewart cut her off and went right to 1948 and the fact that Jews were expelled from their homes in Iran…so what? Tit for tat? On Iran’s “nuclear weapons’ I know Stewart and his writers are too intelligent to not know that the IAEA has not found any and that Ira has on more than one occasion permitted UN Inspectors into their country to inspect their nuclear facilities..captcha/craptcha

What irks me about Stewart is when he lies he does it in such a
funny manner. Sane people know Iran doesn’t have a nuclear
weapons program, and surely Stewart and his staff do.
Stewart would have to have his yarmulke pulled over his eyes
not to have read one credible article/ report debunking the level
at which Iran’s enriching and how she would have to stop IAEA
inspections to enrich to weapons grade. Which would then send
a big red flag to the world, so it ain’t gonna happen.
Stewart’s audience is so infatuated with him and the myth that
he’s a truth teller that they’ll swallow anything he says as if it
were a bagel with gefilte fish and a schmear.
Despite that his audience and Colberts’ are much more likely to
be politically active and aware than average Americans beyond
those on the far right. I read a poll on that; I think it was last
year.
I did think that Stewart’s audience, except for the hecklers,
seemed almost more pro-Palestinian than his guests.
But by repeating the myth of Iran wanting to wipe Israel off the
map, and that she has a nuke program, Stewart does as much
damage as Glenny Beck.
Although I do think that Stewart is a mensch for the most part,
except when it comes to Israel. He’s learning but his curve is
very slow.
I cancelled my subscription to the New Yorker, after sending
what I hope was an email that could boil a frog, over just this
issue because the New Yorker kept repeating the same line
about Ahmadinejad wanting to wipe Israel off the map.
As if Ahmadinejad would ever even have the non-existent nuke
button at his and not Khameni and the mullahs’ trigger fingers.
I actually called Colbert out via email over his lies over Georgia,
Russia and South Ossetia, another UsRael less than covert op. I
got a nice email back from his producer, so if anyone wants the
email address of Colbert’s producer…

OA,
It really cannot be repeated too often that I’m a Dinner Jacket did not say Iran wanted to wipe Israel off the face of the map. It is very, very important that that lie be countered. IADJ has said some pretty nutso things, along with all the reactionary Americans who are holocaust deniers (I know one personally – really amazing to encounter, but it’s been out there on the survivalist right for a long time), but that ain’t one of them.

Stewart is wrong: Iran has never said that she wanted to wipe Israel
off the map. Nor is Iran developing nuclear weapons.
As I’ve mentioned, I worked for Stewart’s (real name Leibowitz)
management company (the people who run his career), and have
also mentioned that I think that, while Stewart gets somethings
right, he also is conflicted and can be Zionism-lite. He still has
that knee jerk response of supporting Israel over everything else.
I think that Barghouti is trying too much to appease — one state
will never work. I’m glad that Ms. Baltzer called Stewart out, but I
also think it’s unfair that the only people who can call Israel out are
American Jews.

Former Executive Director of MoveOn.org, Eli Pariser discusses his new book “The Filter Bubble” and how the architecture of the internet is evolving to match our interests and filtering out information that might challenge our opinions.

The latest from the washington note

On International Youth Day, which was August 12th this year, The Hill published an essay of mine about why the aspirations of youth in the Middle East, particularly Arab youth, matter to America and other global stakeholders